Rulebreaker
Rulebreaker
About
- Username
- Rulebreaker
- Joined
- Visits
- 7,579
- Last Active
Comments
-
We don't think it's a clear cut case. Patrolling gens shouldn't be the go to without a reason (ex: you have pop or don't know where someone is) but not paroling them every once in awhile isn't ideal either unless your getting downs and finding survivors extremely quickly. Also if the survivor is in a area you absolutely know will burn to much time, its better to patrol the gens for a quicker target or to get that one in a different position. It's dictated on circumstances.
-
@HolyDarky said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/432752/different-views-on-billy
is there a reason why you don't compare their addons?
Maybe add that you can crouch tech Billy which can be sometimes helpful.
I feel like the mobility part should get a little bit more attention because it is not only good map mobility (get better value from infos or patrolling gens better) but also catch up mobility. Sometimes you have to M1 (and they are not exposed) and the survivors get the speed boost or they use their exhaustion perk and you see how much distance they make. As a Billy, you can easily catch up on them with your chainsaw and even try to get the hit. As a GF, Oni without power (or not the ability to use it on this survivor), Bubba, or Myers it will hurt you a lot.
Otherwise, I feel like the developers did a good job with bringing billy more in line with other killers. Thus, I don't think he is perfectly fine and balanced like Wesker, Oni, or Artist and still a bit too strong than it's good for the game. In my opinion, it would be cool if the developers could change Overdrive and make it hook based (or maybe when chainsaw downing a survivor but this could encourage billy to slug more). If you hook a survivor, you gain Overdrive for the next 30sec (or something like this or it is like main event and you can press a button to activate it for the next few seconds which gives an additional skill ceiling by using the right timing to trigger it) with the old Overdrive speed and advantages (maybe even nerf the turntime back to 0.75sec and keep the 1sec is Overdrive exclusive). This way, Billy has to work for a better power which is time limited. The current Overdrive happens on average rather rarely which is sad because this gives him an additional skill ceiling but the old version was a bit too much for free. Ghost Face and Myers need a (bigger) rework to become stronger and more fun to play/face while Bubba still needs some tweaks and little buffs to be more in line with other perfect killers. If we compare these killers, I feel like Oni is the best of them design-wise because he has a high skill ceiling, fair counterplay, a really strong power, and is fun to play as and against - overall the basekit is really good.
We didn't because we wanted to compare the base kit of each.
We'll keep it in mind but we've yet to see anyone pull that off in a live game.
This is kinda what we've talked about with UndeddJester. We're not focused too much on it as there's a few other killers who can also do this (Dracula, Blight) but yes, out of the other killers who have insta downs Billy is the only one with constant map mobility with it.
We still don't get why Billy is so liked and probably won't.
-
That's what an insane General looks like, behold the horror!~
-
@GeneralV said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3843013#Comment_3843013
This.
I agree completely, friend.
I would also like the option to turn them off, if possible. If I hear another "Poor performance indeed" I'll go insane.
For the OP, if they do go that route we'd also like voice lines to be optional or minimal. Nick is funny but hearing everyone after so long of silence is jarring to us.
-
@Jock21 said:
Tbh all the killers you've compared Billy except for Oni are considered hella weak.
We compared Billy to each killer with an instant down base kit. Did we miss one?
-
@Xernoton said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3841541#Comment_3841541
I think it is fine that Billy's power can be spammed because he is the only one shot killer that can really be dodged. You can of course try and spin a killer but that will only work, if they're inexperienced. Against a Hillbilly this comes down to mind games. Whoever makes the better read will come out on top and that is additional to the other counterplay you have.
A point blank Hillbilly is indeed very hard to dodge. An experienced player will back revv and keep the saw at 99% until they can all but guarantee a hit. But this isn't really what people talk about when they say you can dodge. Dodging typically refers to his curves and snipes. It is always in your best interest to maintain some distance so that he cannot just back revv. This is not always easy but considering that he has to revv the chainsaw for 2.5 seconds (2.375 seconds in overdrive), which allows you to cover 10 metres (9.5 metres in overdrive) before the saw actually goes off. If you are in a loop, you will probably be able to drop the pallet / vault window in that time. If you know that you are in a terrible spot either way, you can also try and force a M1 by waiting at the window and vaulting when he revvs. This is better than going down in one hit.
Against an Oni you don't have that much counterplay because his power works in a different way. Oni can react to your movements (and he has a gigantic hitbox) while Billy pretty much always has to make a prediction. That is why Billy has his power throughout the entire game.
I definitely see your point with overdrive. I would prefer the mechanic to stay but a rework to where it builds up very slowly for using the chainsaw and then a bunch when you get a hit. That would reward a Billy for playing well (this would require active overdrive to pause when the killer is carrying someone, so it doesn't incentivise slugging) instead of punishing a survivor that plays well. At the moment, I just don't like how he feels to play. Overdrive feels slow (although it is not even that much slower, so it's possible that it's just my own perception) and it takes forever to build up. The funny thing is that this still doesn't get me to use any of the dissipation addons. I could bring nothing at all and it would be pretty much the same result.
We'd disagree on that front. Before we yap more we'll put "dodge" as: "avoiding the hit". Dodging does indeed include point blank. Billy is, to us, as hard to dodge as oni. Demon dash = snipes and Smash = point blank [more or less]. They're both relatively equal [to us] with the main exceptions being Oni's is slightly better (no crashing, can flick, slightly reduced CDs compared to Billy) with more effort and a time limit. He still has to predict to hit, he's still blocked by objects, same counter play when he angry, yet Billy is a discounted version of this 24/7. We can spin around a bad Billy just the same yet its more…ugg feeling to us cause even if we some how managed to keep dodging like that for 5 gens, 1 slip and down we go while Oni would have at least run outta fury ages ago.
-
@UndeddJester said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3841688#Comment_3841688
Fair enough, and to be fair, you've said a number of times you're trying to account for your bias, and acknowledged historically Billy has been a very popular killer... and really Im kinda arguing with my own bias, cause I obviously like Billy 😅🤘
This one is confusing us. So heres a scene: Injured survivor is working on a gen. Billy saws from who knows where to try and hit said survivor. He does not hit with the saw but stops just abit from where said survivor was and goes a runs seconds to simply boop the survivor down should there be little to work with. Now change the survivor to healthy. Now Billy has to land the saw or is required to boop the survivor a second time before said survivor goes down. Hence our line of thought here that being injured is still a detriment as much if not more.
Regarding this issue, I do understand the scenario you describe, but in this hypothetical there is an assumption of when the survivor attempts to leave the gen, and we both can only really compare our anecdotal experience.
Blight is a killer I've traditionally disliked, and it was one tip from one streamer that changed my opinion on Blight completely, and that was, you need to ensure that Blight doesn't get a hit off his initial rush to a gen. This means you need to ensure you're ready to move to safety immediately for if Blight heads your way. This one change to my playstyle, and now I really enjoy playing vs. Blight.
It's the same thing with Billy. Billy can't turn quickly or redirect once he's charging; you can predict where he will come from off a hook, and he can't adjust to cut you off (unlike Blight). This means you should often be able to make good headway to safety as long as you pay attention.
Maybe I'm better at this skill than the average survivor cause I don't run WoO or Exhaustion perks, so for me to survive I have to account for issues reaching safety more often against most killers, so Billy is just an extension of this playstyle. I've rarely had issues with Billy m1ing me after a whiff that I can't also explain as a sub-optimal movement or a poor prediction on my part...
However of course this is all anecdotal and subjective... so I think we've probably explored all objective arguments we can make...
If Hillbilly does need to be nerfed because it's too easy for him to m1 off a saw, I feel adding a cooldown would be the wrong way to nerf him. I'd hit his miss movement speed and cooldown timings... but I personally think this is all fine at base, it's only really his Overdrive that I can really buy as something that pushes him over the top.
Maybe with his Overdrive, I'd consider giving him the longer duration on it back, but have the recoveries for it be worse than those at base. Either that, or I'd also consider keeping it a short duration with those penalties, but making it activatable off his secondary, so he can at least choose when to use it.
That would be my direction looking at Billy... but... I have a lot of fun vs. Billy, so I'm not really looking to nerf him.
Fair enough.
Though we wouldn't mind somethin nerfed, this is more us trying to see why people like Billy so much and if our points in comparison to the other one shot killers is fair enough to warrant our dislike. No need to give the audience nerf or buff ideas, we all know they watchin. -
@UndeddJester said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3841568#Comment_3841568
Just to clarify one thing, his turn rate and speed was something Billy has always been able to do, but it required setting controller sensitivity to 70-100%, since that also scaled his Q/E and mouse turn rate.
Most classic Billy mains played with controller sensitivity set to 100% to have the most potential at loops, but it obviously was the most difficult to control, but this was well known in Billy community. The changes that BHVR made standardised Billy so that his turn rate was the same for everyone, rather than it being a secret setting for PC players only.
Billy has functioned the same way for years, and often cited as one of the most fun killers in the game since he was released. The only thing that makes him stronger now is his potential is higher in the hands of a really skilled Billy when using Overdrive... but most BIllys I see can't use Overdrive too well…
So tbh, I'm not really sure why everyone seems to hate Billy all of sudden... outside of Overdrive he's basically the same as he always was with some basekit add-ons... to be fair he got a LOT of numbers buffs in 7.5.0, but a lot of them have been slashed again by 8.3.0...
So I'm not too sure why Billy is suddenly so controversial...
In our defense, we've always disliked Billy so nothin new here.
-
@UndeddJester said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3841499#Comment_3841499
Thats not entirely correct. Our words that were quoted are in response to "injuries don't matter to Billy". An injured survivor is just as if not more in danger because he can simply run up to you, stop, and m1 down.
I believe I addressed this point though, but to try again... the assertion is that Billy can reliably just stop next to a survivor and get a free m1? This I don't believe is true, and is the crux of this injured argument.
We seem to accept his chainsaw is hard to land, so it being an instantdown is justified because its hard to hit. No one has countered or challenged me on this so I assume we all agree.
The contention seems to be that once a survivor is injured Billy can go for chainsaw hits, and it he misses, he just takes an m1… well Billy if he stops in air, he has a 2.7s recovery. With both add-ons this can become 2.295s at best. If he hits terrain it's 2.5s recovery at base and with bothl add-ons can come down to 1.88s.
Demogorgon recovers in 2.25s on a missed shred and can take this down to 2.0025s with his one add-on for it. Demo can spam just as much to get next to survivors as Billy can, with no difference if he bumps terrain or not, and he recovers a whole 0.5s base and 0.2925 at best faster than Billy does on a miss.
I am aware Demo can't turn around terrain, but if whiffing for gap close was really the way to score hits reliably, this is how Demo would always play to get hits, lunge near to any tile hit or miss, then follow up with an m1... Now it is possible to get hits this way, but if it was as free as you guys describe, Demo wouldn't be so low on the killer list as he is… but that's not how it works in practise.
This recovery into an m1 is effectively where we are disagreeing, because if Billy can easily score a hit off a whiff with an m1, then yes, he is broken... but in my experience he doesn't often get that m1… and unlike Chucky, Blight, Spirit, Nurse, who can get a hit with their power quite easily to allow they easy downs when tunneling an injured survivor, Billy either has to land his saw, or get that m1.
If my contention is correct that Billy can't reliably recover off a saw whiff into an m1, Billy can't do what these other killer can do (the tap and chase down hit). This means Billy using his saw is mostly the same threat, whether you're injured or not... and if he isn't using his saw, he is an m1 killer.
If I'm still not grasping the concept, I apologise, but that's the best I can understand what we're taking about.
I believe I addressed this point though, but to try again... the assertion is that Billy can reliably just stop next to a survivor and get a free m1? This I don't believe is true, and is the crux of this injured argument.
Depending on what counts as "next to" and "reliably" we have both seen and done so as Billy. We can stop close enough where unless the survivor is next to something we can relatively quickly smack them right after.
[Just so we're absolutely clear the "contention" is only about if injured survivors are at any more risk correct?] If Billy misses and stops near a survivor he can very effectively m1 yes. Yes less than a second difference between demos shred whifs and Billy whiffs and both can "spam". Demo however launches himself however far should the doggy go for it while Billy can quickly stop. Its not trying to whiff to get closer, its that he can try to saw and stop nearby an injured survivor should he see one to then boop even should he miss (assuming he didn't veer stupidly far off course for some reason). Demo does not (to our knowledge) easily control where he lands, at least compared to Billy.
If my contention is correct that Billy can't reliably recover off a saw whiff into an m1, Billy can't do what these other killer can do (the tap and chase down hit). This means Billy using his saw is mostly the same threat, whether you're injured or not... and if he isn't using his saw, he is an m1 killer.
This one is confusing us. So heres a scene: Injured survivor is working on a gen. Billy saws from who knows where to try and hit said survivor. He does not hit with the saw but stops just abit from where said survivor was and goes a runs seconds to simply boop the survivor down should there be little to work with. Now change the survivor to healthy. Now Billy has to land the saw or is required to boop the survivor a second time before said survivor goes down. Hence our line of thought here that being injured is still a detriment as much if not more.
-
@Xernoton said:
Billy has had a spamable power for the last 2 years and it was never an issue. Even when overheat was still a factor, you just had to wait for the chainsaw to cool down a little before you tried again. Besides that, they toned overheat down to be completely obsolete. I only overheated when I played Driftking Billy, which is now weaker than ever (seriously, bad move BHVR).
The difference between Billy and other insta down killers is that you can dodge him fairly easy most of the time. I used to play against survivors, that would mind game and run wide to dodge. Now it seems like most players think of it as rocket science and just play in the most predictable way possible.
Overdrive is pretty much a non-factor at this point. I barely ever get to use it (takes forever to build up, which is good but dissipates very quickly, which is bad), so we are back to where the mechanic that is meant to add some complexity to the killer is basically obsolete. I cannot put into words how disappointed I am with that. I would have much rather had overdrive go up even slower but build up a bunch when you hit a survivor and pause when you carry them (just to make slugging less of an obvious choice). The reduced overdrive speed feels terrible to me as well. We are back at a point where in many situations survivors feel the illusion of a threat, while the Billy player knows that there is absolutely no way for them to get that hit, if the survivor doesn't play horribly bad.
That was what really rubbed me the wrong way with him. It always looks so close but in the back of your head you know for a fact that there is nothing you can do either way.
Oni has the advantage that he can flick at the end of a rush. That fundamentally changes the way his power can be used. I find him to be more fun than Billy at the moment. It might have something to do with me still learning Oni, which is always something provides fun for me but in many situations I prefer to play him over Billy, who has been my main for over 2 years (almost 3 years by now).
When it comes to skill expression, Billy's skill floor definitely has been reduced with the more forgiving cooldowns. This was necessary because the penalty for a missed chainsaw was excruciating. Right after the PTB, when they increased the curve time to 1.0 seconds, his skill ceiling was arguably at the highest point (except maybe for that glitch that existed where he could turn at the end of a curve and still hit a survivor). I honestly liked that. You had to learn how to manage overdrive and the extra speed made curving even harder. Now he just feels watered down. His skill ceiling was reduced again (not a good decision) and that made him feel a lot less fun to me.
I fully recognise that I am biased (how could I not after putting more 1000+ hours into this killer?) but I just want him to get back that extra skill ceiling (and Driftking Billy!) and feel fun again. If there need to be more nerfs to balance that out, then so be it. I have always been of the opinion that killers should have a relatively low skill floor, so that players can get into it and a high skill ceiling, so that players can hone their skills and show off a little (we all know how good that feels).
[Apologies for the delay we're busy lately]
Billy has had a spamable power pretty much forever (bar possibly when overheat was just introduced). He's always been a pain to us since we started way back but this isn't about it being a problem more of if we're fair to call Billy bs despite our bias. When overheat was in effect, it did give some form of punishment for repeatedly missing (admittedly a metric ton by average standards) which, to us, lined up with the other 1 shot killers, even if poorly since only bad Billy's ever were affected by it.
It's been repeated that you can dodge Billy easier than others but we disagree there, it's about the same as Oni. You predict and bait "Oni smash" the same as a point blank Billy but Oni is on a timer and has to prime his power with blood. Meyers and GF are effectively m1 insta downs so while harder to dodge point blank than a saw, they'd have to get there first, similar to bubba who also has no inherent mobility nor stealth like the later 2 but increased lethality with his saw.
Overdrive for us is more of an insult to us as if we can repeatedly dodge he gets "better", but that's our own thoughts on it.
As we said (or implied) Oni does have the better version but Billy's isn't that far off while also having it from the start at no effort for it like Oni does. We also have pointed that you pretty much dodge in a similar vein as Billy.
We are no in-depth expert so we'll defer to you on the history and skill expression. Being biased here's fine. It's supposed to give us different ways to look at Billy so bias away.
-
@UndeddJester said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3841001#Comment_3841001
All fair, but the difference in all cases is that survivors can bait, predict and juke Billy, even out in the open... but for the other examples, in the same scenarios where they can juke Billy, they can't juke the other killers. Survivors need supporting structures to avoid taking hits.
Billy can only turn around terrain at the start of his dash, he only has specific points in the loop cycle he can actually go for hits, and it is highly telegraphed to the survivor. This is unlike Blight, Nurse and Chucky who can still turn/redirect their hit after their initial rush. Their effectively lethality therefore exists for the entire duration of their ability, rather than Billy where if he is not on the correct line after 0.75s, he misses.
This is the reason Chucky and Blight can't instant down and have a cooldown, because they can effectively turn around terrain with far more control than Billy, and at the end of their dashes they can turn on the spot and still land a hit. Nurse is similarly far superior than Billy, cause while she needs to predict, she has full control of her lunge in any direction, and can get a second blink to correct her prediction and still land a hit.
Billy has his 2.7s recovery and then has to charge up his chainsaw again form each attempt, which is often enough time to vault a window, throw a pallet or make it around terrain where Billy has to again steer around terrain to land a hit.
The simple reason why Billy gets to spam his ability is he can fire off 5 attempts and often miss 4 of them, and this isn't strange for Billy.
All the other cases, like Double Blink Nurse, Chucky S&D, Blight Dash, Oni slam, they often hit their ability nearly every time.
We'd argue that you can bait, predict and juke the others listed (sans bubba). If you do manage to dodge the likes of Chucky, Blight, and Nurse enough the survivors are rewarded via a break where they can't immediately go again or are nerfed if they do. Meanwhile Billy can miss and go again and again and many of the Billys we have seen miss about often as the others (unless its a particularly bad Billy). Bar Nurse each of those killers also needs to play around the terrain, though admittedly they have a far easier time with the closest being Oni.
@UndeddJester said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3841419#Comment_3841419
I'm trying to pick up what you're trying to say, but I'm struggling. It sounds like you're arguing against the fundamental design of Billy as an instadown killer with map mobility. If I take your Oni analogy, we're saying Billy has high mobility at all times, and then just m1s a survivor with an instadown?
That's not how Billy works, and we have over 7 years of gameplay to pull from to see that map mobility with a spammabale instadown doesnt make Billy OP... when he still had overheat, it was such a slow penalty to bulld up, it was mostly non existent and no one cared about it, and Billy was consider B tier tops.
The fact is, landing a hit with Hillbilly's chainsaw is not easy against survivors who know what they are doing, it's not the same thing as landing an m1 as you describe with your Oni example. As I've said already, his chainsaw is highly telegraphed, easy to misaim, and cannot be corrected once his direction is locked in, nor can he flick at the end of his rush, all of which makes him quite predictable and easy to dodge...
As Xernoton points out, his Overdrive gives him the boost he needs to score a number of hits he otherwise simply can't, and without Overdrive, he is simply old Billy; too difficult to land hits with reliably to be in the top flight of killers. It's his overdrive that pushed him up there and why he needed nerfs.
What you seem to not be considering is yes, Billy is dangerous with his instantdown... but once you are injured, if Billy is chasing you with his chainsaw, there is effectively no difference, and if he's not using his chainsaw, he's an m1 killer. If he M1s you, if he's trying to use teh chainsaw, the m1 hasn't really changed anything about the dynamic of the current chase. He still needs to hit you with his hard to hit chainsaw in order to down you, so his m1 hasn't really helped him much.
Rulebreakers closing assessment highlights their point:
We disagree with the injury thoughts due to Billy being able to stop nearby to simply whack a survivor down, but we see a point in that it needs to be a threat. We're unsure if having, say bubbas CD, would immediately kill his threat though.
Their issue seems to be that Billy can miss, recover fast, then just go for an m1 quickly afterwards, but I don't believe this is a problem, since this is often the case with Blight and Chucky as well, and their chance of missing their ability in the first place is way lower than Billy's is, so they have even less reason to often be able to land a hit.
This isn't a problem to my mind because Billy doesn't have the ability to win a hit and then follow up with his power to get a relatively quickand easy down like Chucky, Blight, Spirit, Dracula, etc... Billy has to hit his chainsaw for a fast down, and getting an m1 doesn't help him at all with that.
Their issue seems to be that Billy can miss, recover fast, then just go for an m1 quickly afterwards, but I don't believe this is a problem, since this is often the case with Blight and Chucky as well, and their chance of missing their ability in the first place is way lower than Billy's is, so they have even less reason to often be able to land a hit.
Thats not entirely correct. Our words that were quoted are in response to "injuries don't matter to Billy". An injured survivor is just as if not more in danger because he can simply run up to you, stop, and m1 down. Like a wraith Drac Bat or spirit with out the downsides of their powers (having to uncloak and not being able to see for the later 2). It is similar to the others but since Billy is also an insta down killer healing is not very effective either but it does "force" him to try and saw instead of m1. As below:
@Devil_hit11 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3841166#Comment_3841166
i think your missing @Rulebreaker point. his argument is that billy's lower performance ball is greater than his higher performance ball even when not accounting reliability.
in other words, avoiding a billy chainsaw out in the open for him landing a hit is higher reward for billy to succeed than all mentioned killers. it is little bit like argument if Oni's Katana as basic m1 was instant down and his power to move super fast was a bonus power-up. He'd be better than 80% of m1 killers as his weak form, not accounting his real ability.
that's kinda where billy is. he's better than 80% of the killers just by the fact that he has base-kit instant down that doesn't require any setup while being reliable hit if the player is good. His curving and his ability to play global & hit run with pallets is probably what makes him ascend as a killer into higher tier of killer. to me, it just looks a classic Killer camp hooks with instant down argument. Mobility allows you to return to hook faster hence they think that is a problem. other killer have to earn the ability to instant down and none of them except for Oni have mobility+instant down but Oni's drawback of limit duration+earning power can make camping a sub optimal choice.
@Devil_hit11 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3841456#Comment_3841456
kind of. most player are unlikely to mindgame a pointblank chainsaw hit. evidence to that was twin's rework victor where people see victor as not loopable. I don't agree but logic is same for billy chainsaw.
It's his overdrive that pushed him up there and why he needed nerfs.
what was first thing that got nerfed in billy rework? Missed cooldown add-on's. Like they don't apply to over drive and than they also nerfed %'s to be irrelevant and in 2nd iteration of nerf's, higher missed cooldown. notice that it is not overdrive that keeps getting nerfed, it's missed cooldown.
it's not the same thing as landing an m1 as you describe with your Oni example. As I've said already, his chainsaw is highly telegraphed, easy to misaim, and cannot be corrected once his direction is locked in, nor can he flick at the end of his rush, all of which makes him quite predictable and easy to dodge...
all of which doesn't exist or doesn't matter when billy is out in the open.
What you seem to not be considering is yes, Billy is dangerous with his instantdown... but once you are injured, if Billy is chasing you with his chainsaw, there is effectively no difference, and if he's not using his chainsaw, he's an m1 killer. If he M1s you, if he's trying to use teh chainsaw, the m1 hasn't really changed anything about the dynamic of the current chase. He still needs to hit you with his hard to hit chainsaw in order to down you, so his m1 hasn't really helped him much.
His chainsaw creates sunk cost fallacy in healing. you healed but you got instant downed so why i did heal, maybe i should stayed on gen.
That's not how Billy works, and we have over 7 years of gameplay to pull from to see that map mobility with a spammabale instadown doesnt make Billy OP... when he still had overheat, it was such a slow penalty to bulld up, it was mostly non existent and no one cared about it, and Billy was consider B tier tops.
because map mobility and instant down is pretty average by itself. anti-loop/ability to outplay tiles is more important however billy's map mobility and instant down allows him to strategy within killer meta strategies when his chase is decent. one of those being proxy camping→tunneling and other being slugging.
i am not saying that @Rulebreaker is right or wrong about said ideas but that largely what he thinks about billy being unfair. instant down with no preparation and mobility with instant down. if you want my opinion on it, i think billy is good power-level while Myer's/Oni/GFs being under-powered instant downs. they should get buffs.
You get our point (granted we're having a hard time trying to understand the example in the 2nd paragraph of the first quote).
-
@GeneralV said:
I don't have much to say about cooldowns, mobility or skill. Not this time.
I just think Hillbilly is fun to go against. Especially before Overheat and Overdrive. OG Hillbilly was perfect.
Fair enough but we would like to ask why so we can try and see it.
-
@UndeddJester said:
The main trade off for Billy compared to other similar killers is once he has committed, he cannot correct. Hillbillys power works because he effectively loses control after his initial aim.
His power is spammable yes, but a step to the slide or a slight misaim or incorrect prediction on his part, and he is whiffing with no way to correct it... and this inability to correct it means Billy is forced to predict since it's impossible for him to react. This ensures misses happens often,and is what makes Billy so engaging for survivor.
Compare this to: -
- Oni who can flick his aim at the end of his dash to land a hit.
- Blight and Chucky who both can turn considerably at the end of their dashes.
- Nurse who can literally hit in a 180 on the end of her blink.
- Bubba who can easily change direction and create a near unavoidable dead zone in front of him off any prediction.
- Myers and Ghost Face have considerably different gameplay loops, are more loopable than Billy, but also FAR simpler to play and easier to capitalise on predictions and survivor errors, simply taking an m1 for an instant down.
The potential for Billy is really high if you play perfectly with no input mistakes and perfect prediction, but the 2 feed into each other. An incorrect prediction can easily cause you to mind game yourself and make what would have been a hit a miss, even if you input flawlessly. Similarly a perfect prediction can still regularly miss if the input is also not correct.
If he can't spam it, say by adding a cooldown, the threat of his power stops working, because he is simply too hard to hit with. Injuries are less valuable on Billy, as an inured survivor basically fights Billy as a regular m1 killer, or at no difference to how he fights with his saw.
As we stated to toystory3Monkey, he can stop very easily to course correct to simply try as many times as he wants (not always practical but it doesn't stop many). His only real worries are "am I burning to much time" and "don't crash".
For example: with nurse she also must predict survivors, however if she misses she has a fatigue and has to wait for her blinks to recharge. Billy can simply wind up, go, and should he miss he can simply stop a little away and try again from the get go. And unlike nurse, his will put you on the dirt on the first successful prediction.
We already compared Oni so:
Chucky and blight are limited by CDs and are both not insta downs.
...woops already done nurse…moving on…
Bubba doesn't have Billy's mobility while having similar weaknesses as detailed in the op.
toystory3Monkey has also went with this reasoning and we are considering how much weight it holds towards Billy.
We think your giving Billy to much credit but that might be our bias showing.
We disagree with the injury thoughts due to Billy being able to stop nearby to simply whack a survivor down, but we see a point in that it needs to be a threat. We're unsure if having, say bubbas CD, would immediately kill his threat though.
-
@Toystory3Monkey said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3840722#Comment_3840722
Well yes, but Oni's power on its own is MUCH more threatening than Billy, which events it out in a way.
Oni can slide around collisions, he can change his attack direction, he charges the attack way faster and can potentially down multiple survivors (though that part rarely comes into effect).
It's like why Myers' T3 is so much weaker than Oni's or Billy - because it takes different (less) amount of skill and effort to get which also gives survivors less counterplay to it.
Billy's power takes the most skill to use, but Oni's power is easier while not weaker if not stronger, but it has to be earned through playing powerless killer, while Myers only gets oneshot and mild stat boost yet he only needs to look at survivors.
It's usually the same story with similar powers like that. One takes the most effort/skill to USE while not having any other limits to it, the other is easy/straightforward but has less potential or it is just better but has some serious downside or condition that you have to play around which balances it out until certain point.
While we agree with the overall idea (more effort for less restrictions), we disagree with the Oni Billy comparison. To us, Billy is mildly harder than Oni while pretty much having a discount version of his power.
Billy can course correct via stopping (simply let go of the button and he stops almost on a dime)... which he then tries again, while Oni has both a dash and a close range attack. It pretty much evens out to the same thing (both are dodged the exact same way, both have similar miss CDs, and wind ups [less than a 1 second difference]) with Billy only having to worry about survivors getting to the next loop and not crashing while Oni has to worry about the next loop and his timer.
-
@TheArbiter said:
I'm not sure what you mean about spammable powers, technically just about every killer can "spam"
We'll call spam: "Repeated use with no major drawbacks". Billy can repeatedly try to saw survivors down with no downside beyond "not crashing into object". Oni can "spam" instant downs but has an hour of power, Bubba has tokens he needs to manage (he can't saw without a token) in addition to the wind up and not crashing. GF and Meyers need to build up for theirs which is an hr of power (meyers for all, gf for individual survivors). Each other killer has some noticable form of cd.
-
- B
- D
- C?
- A
- C
- False
- 4?
- C
5 cookies say we royally screwed up ~
-
@Toystory3Monkey said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3840704#Comment_3840704
I mean, it's just a different kind of input.
Billy doesn't require constant attention, but he takes immense mechanical skill to use efficiently which includes very fast reaction speed or good prediction skill to counter dodging.
His saw while being a threat in almost every loop, isn't really a guaranteed down every time and not a guaranteed hit after they've nerfed the post-saw CD recently.
That's fair, we did ask after all.
The same could be said for Oni though couldn't it? Yet as we compared above Oni has to build up for it and has a time limit when he does. None of the instant downs are guaranteed which is why it didn't factor into our thought process(es).
-
@Toystory3Monkey said:
I dont think there's an inherent problem with "Spammable" powers.
Sometimes it's part of the design philosophy that makes the gameplay more distinct and allows the killer to be very relentless and aggressive in chase instead of carefully calculating every step they take. The latter gameplay doesnt appeal to everyone.
Singularity f/e is the definition of a spammable power design and damned be the one who says it's a bad power design.
Not inherently but to us that depends on what that power is. For example: Singularity is fine because it requires more "work" to pull off via set up and does not immediately put the survivors onto the dirt. But that's just our thoughts on the matter.
-
@Akumakaji said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3838951#Comment_3838951
I am sorry for you regulars :D But I honestly think that this is what happened … sadly this isn't a short throwaway easy answer like "hurdur killers tunnel because its the easiest and most braindead strategy and playing killer is piss easy these days".
BTW, not implaying that you would ever say something like this, I know that you guys are about the most levelheaded peeps around.
ohh we don't mind hearing it again and again cause it is effectively what happened, we just want cookies for it~
Though us being called level headed is new…cookie worthy it is -
@Akumakaji said:
The games problem is much more nuanced and complex, then many players give it credit:
pre 6.1 killers was at its worst in sheer player experience. Most survivors had multiple levels of safety nets and old DH was so busted that nearly no one left the house without it, and it was so soulcrushing to do a good play on a survivor, but then "nah nah nah, did you really outplay when I can do this?" and dashed away, laughing in "skill issues".
Then the 6.1 patch pulled the rug out from under the collective survivor population and bereft of their most potent survivla tool, that many had started to rely on in a true crutch way, many survivors fell into a stupor. It really was as if nearly no one could play the game anymore, survivors ran around like headless chicken and many were too scared to even touch gens. I vividly remember that it felt like an all you can kill buffet, and in the games I played as survivor, there were matches were I finished 4 gens from start to finish, because everyone else was just too frigging scared to touch them.
It wasn't helped by the fact that many killers struck back with a vengeance and fell on the helpless survivor population without mercy. The stupor held on for two days, then many survivors started adapting, and adapting they did. They learned that, in order to survive, they had to stop wasting time and be efficient. This adverse conditions bread into the survivor population to split up and do gens seperately, and to at least pay a modicum of attention to the main gen and gen spread, while not doing too many totems or chests, if any at all.
Gens soon started flying off the shelfs and killers now really had to show what they got, but for a short while the game felt really fresh and fun. But new DH turned out just slightly less obnoxious then the old one and killers discovered that they had to defend their gens with all they got, so Overbrine and Eruption became the new killer meta, driving survivors nuts and pushing them towards gen efficiency and rushing even further.
Eventually all this tools were nerfed on both sides, but the damage was done: both sides had learned to play as efficiently as possible and to trim all unnecessary fat from their playstyles - all that was left were lean and mean surviving and killing machiens. You can change the game around survivors and players, but you can't make them unlearn what they learned during this times of suffering.
And thats were we stand now: both sides feel like they are backed against the wall before the game even begins, both sides have learned the most efficient ways to play to game and increase their chances and both sides basically optimised fun out of the equation. The game is often cited as a "fun party game about killers and survivors", but eh, its as competitive as ever, with the MMR system forcing survivors to play consistently well, unless they want to drop down into MMR hell (that happened to me once).
What could help to revitalize the game were a real and true health chapter: there is so much skill bloat, maybe it would be good to reevalute a lot of the skills, turn some into general perks and only give each survivor and killer only two perks. Also BHVR should think more about restrictions: while it was always a fun design choice to not limit builds, it now severely limits design space. Caps on certain maximum values like repair speed or limits on how many perks of a certain category could be taken would help to streamline certain aspects of the game. If we could only use one repair perk, maybe we could give them all a bit more interesting and unique additional effects. And with killer perks, one of the big limiters will always be Nurse: "this fun perk for Trapper will be utterly broken on Nurse, so we will artificially power it down" … Awakened Awareness could never show its real potential, because Nurse, just zooming off after a hook, was just too broken - so why not ban the perk on Nurse and Blight and thus free up design space for all the other killers?
Incentivice survivors to do gens together and give killers a true incentive to not rush the killing, but having it in their best intrest to spead hooks and not kill a survivor early, would help to give everyone time to play and time to shine. Maybe even set up a director AI like in many horde shooter style games, but instead of spawning specials according to how well the players do, let the Entity block gens or eat good pallets if the survivors are too good, and let it respawn a pallet or set up a medkit in the corner the survivor is hiding. Don't listen to the "hur dur why should they be rewarded for playing badly?" crowd, but give it a try.
By going back and redesigning a couple of the games basic rules and setting up other hard and fast limits, it would elevate the game play so much.
We need a cookie counter everytime we see this
-
@Vishlumbra said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3838687#Comment_3838687
That's on the players though. We had little trouble and if we could do it, those better than us can as well. We asked a similar question in the previous post that's relevant here: What could the devs reward that would be acceptable? What would be worth it for people to follow this gameplay?
Halloween event (Haunted by Daylight) gave a nice bonus to bloodpoints in the form of pumpkins, opening portals and even using the void crystals, each of those rewarded the players, also extended the matches and they granted an extra advantage to both sides if they did such sidequests. I think that we need to take a look at interactions between perks, generator repair time and in general, extend the game a bit.
The fact that some skilled players manage to recover doesn’t mean that every killer can, especially without support or incentives. With the wide range of player skill levels, any gameplay adjustments need to work for the broader player base, not just the elite few. Balance isn’t about what some players can do; it’s about providing a fair baseline for everyone. By offering rewards or adjustments that encourage certain gameplay styles, developers could create more positive experiences for both sides, regardless of skill.
Survivors are naturally rewarded for cooperation, healing, and unhooking—things that make the game more fun for everyone. Killers don’t have the same incentives for spreading hooks or going easy on certain tactics. Adding rewards for these styles of play could really balance out the experience.
And here's where our point is proven. See one of us actually tried a competitive tournament back in 2018 (don't remember exact date) and there were a different rules than what you stated here. Then you point that survivors being handicapped which brings multiple thoughts such as "why are people worried enough about that to install a rule?" and "these people camp this much and are supposed to be the best?" and the like. If the killer camps it's no wonder gens go fast, the killer isn't being a threat.
Well first of all rules have changed because the game has changed and evolved.
The need for camping or tunneling often reflects the balance issues within the game. Competitive players may use these strategies because they’re effective, but if killers feel forced into these methods, it signals areas where DbD could provide more tools for killers to play effectively without limiting survivor interactivity. When survivors complete gens too quickly, killers often feel they have no choice but to camp or tunnel to have a chance at catching up. It’s not that killers want to play this way—it’s a response to survivors speeding through objectives. If survivors weren’t rushing as much, killers could play more strategically across the map
Maybe it's because those players rely on said strategies to much and are bluntly unable to do much else? It shows what works best for them as each and every player is different. It's a similar vein to how many killers have a "main" who they excel with and suck with others even if they're considered "high tier".
The competitive meta has naturally adapted to survivors working in teams with efficient coordination. Survivors have access to perks, items, and strategies that can make them significantly harder to catch or eliminate. Tunneling and slugging counteract these advantages, rebalancing situations where survivors may be trying to outpace the killer entirely by focusing solely on generators or using "second chance" perks like Decisive Strike and Borrowed Time. You are also implying that profesional players that get paid to win are bad?
League is different than DBD. League is an actual competitive game, DBD is no where close. DBD has much less players than League. DBD has more ways for players to straight up make others miserable for no practical reason than League (League to its credit can make players miserable but it's atleast in a practical sense).
Balancing a game isn’t about preventing players from having fun; it’s about ensuring that both sides can win if they use effective strategies. Riot Games balances League of Legends based on the highest potential of each champion, which creates a fair playing field, even if it sometimes results in certain champions or strategies being less enjoyable for some. This type of balancing would make sense in DBD, too, so killers and survivors each have a fair shot at success based on skill rather than relying on “feelings-based” changes.
Tunneling and slugging aren’t about making the game “miserable.” They’re responses to how fast survivors can complete objectives, which is often faster than killers can reliably manage without these strategies. If DBD were balanced purely around “fun” feelings without considering practical in-game needs, killers would have to rely on suboptimal tactics and struggle to succeed consistently, leading to more frustration on their end.
Extra necessary objectives would be fine with us but as we've seen how much gens can possibly regress it's would be unwise to implement. Some of these can be flipped to the killer. They might have had that idea with what happens when killers utilize the strategies you say are necessary with multiple perks that make things a pain (side note: what makes survivors truly unhookable? We can only think of temporary). We thought we weren't balancing things based on "an utopian concept of people acting by the approved norms of niceness." So why add a slowdown that can be used regardless if said strategies are used or not (disregarding the fact that people sadly only did pumpkins when effectively forced and currently totems work under this same idea)
Balancing based on strategic effectiveness isn’t the same as balancing around “niceness.” Killers who tunnel or slug often do so to control the game due to the pressure they face, not to be disruptive or “unkind.” Rather than enforcing “niceness,” balancing around alternative objectives allows for fairer strategic choices that can diminish the necessity for killers to use these tactics as frequently.
So we're unsure of what specifically your addressing here so if we missed the point we'll apologize and ask for specific things. When perks change they affect each killer differently yes but we ask why on occasions that's not enough? Since reworking takes more time and effort why not use these as stp gap measures?
Reworking perks frequently introduces new meta cycles and forces players to readjust, which can be disruptive. While perk reworks can be useful, they’re best when supporting a solid foundation rather than compensating for underlying balance issues.
We don't repeat this to be mean, we repeat this cause it seems true to us: your arguments are not doing a good job of what you're trying to do.
We're ignoring this next paragraph cause "impossible to win" is heavily untrue.
As for the math, we've stated to others that clean numbers don't work in DBD because of one important element: the human element. Humans are prone to errors, which adds unknown variables in those clean numbers.
Asking to attend both sides equally? My only argument is that if you end up implementing perks that try to counter complaints, could be useful to ask yourselves why such strategies began.
The math was released by BH, not me, and it´s "shady" at best, people believe that the actual win rate across the board for every killer is 60% which is not correct, each survivor has a 40% survival rate, variables, "human element" (as you mention) so I am a bit lost in what point you are trying to make. I am ASKING for balance, not defending tunneling and slugging, which I dont even do, hell I play Sadako…
When im mediating and saying sure, prevent strategies that are unfun for survivors, just make sure you check why killers rely on such strategies and you just try to shut down the thought completly, well, it comes across as just as lazy or biased.
Halloween event
All that's fine and good but detracted from your original goal of "stop complaining". Or the goalposts have been moved.
The fact that some skilled players
You were previously talking about "HAVE TO BALANCE A GAME TO WHAT IS POSSIBLE TO DO. Everyone, eventually, plays to get better." no? Wouldn't that concept apply here? Since it is possible to win without resorting to those strategies, should they be hampered enough wouldn't players get better eventually enough?
Survivors are naturally rewarded for cooperation, healing, and unhooking
That's due to the asymmetrical nature of the game. The team of 4 would naturally be rewarded for trying to help the group instead of the self.
Offering rewards for certain play styles would inscite some but part (ok most) of the problem is people are doing these strategies right out the gate regardless. Is it necessary to tunnel at 5 gens? No. Do people do so anyways? Yes. We've previously said sometimes they are needed but people are heavily abusing them, how would these rewards get those types to stop?
The need for camping or tunneling often reflects the balance issues within the game.
Or hear us out here, they reflect the desire to have simple ways to kill. We're pretty sure we've already spelled out the difference. Second, what causes a killer to feel forced? It's a personal thing that varies from each individual. We don't feel forced into anything if the first 3 gens pop after a chase as long as we burnt through enough resources to make the next super short. Meanwhile killer whowhatsit may feel forced if that first gen pops after 3 seconds of getting a hook.
The competitive meta has
And killers have ways to catch survivors via powers and perks to make this easier. Also you may want to pick different perks from the survivor side as those 2 only work well if the killer tunnels. Also yes, if that situation you keep describing is the best they can do, we'll happily call bad. Just because you get paid to do something doesn't mean you are always the best. Sure they might be better than us, but sitting there at the hook after first chase leaving 3 others unimpeded? Really? Not going to call that good in our life time unless some major shake ups happen. (we're getting sidetracked)
Balancing a game isn’t about preventing players from having fun
Tell us, would you play a game if it made you miserable? No pay, no fame, just in your spare time, just to play something to make yourself suffer. The game needs to balance both practical and fun aspects. We restate we agree sometimes tunneling and slugging are needed, they are unfun but valid (for lack of better words) and when used in moderation are reasonable and tolerated. But when people do so starting out, when there's no pressure (which like we said above varies from person to person) it's unreasonable to assume many are ok with their match ending in the first 5 minutes or doing nothing but crawling for effectively 4. They don't do it out of necessity, they do so cause they want to for whatever reason, malicious or not. We also realized you never talked about these types of people…thoughts on them?
Balancing based on strategic
The problem above applies here. People are using said tactics to make others miserable intentionally or not (though the slugging out the gate is a pretty good indicator of the former). You'd be giving more tools to those who don't (admittedly a YAY from us) do this while simultaneously not keeping these in check.
Asking to attend both sides equally?
Your not really asking that though. From what we've seen it's: "everyone stop whining to nerf killer" to "survivors can win anytime they want as long as they all work for it" to "comp shows why tunneling and slugging are needed" to "let's get back to topic (which credit is due, you tried)" to "*mental snap* start complaining" to next is what we can only sum as a mashup of things to now which is "find ways to reduce these strategies while simultaneously defending them and explaining thought process (including math)". This is all filtered through our doggy brains mind you but it seems accurate enough.
The human element is to point out that trying to use math to work out things here is useless at best. As someone above said, it's not Bhvr's math as they only put up kill rates as far as we know. Kill rate isn't equal to win rate (per the definition your using is 3k+). We maybe lazy but again, it's not what you were doing in any meaningful capacity. And one pot shot deserves another, the last time you said you were done you came back within 24 hours.
-
@Vishlumbra said:
Hi, thanks for taking the time to read everything.
My general concern and the solution I’m proposing is not promoting these strategies that affect the survivor experience, I am saying that if we balance the game in order to protect such experience, we have to keep in mind why those became a thing. This game has two well defined sides, killer and survivor, you can’t just call out one side saying they ruin the experience and beg to nerf them to the ground without taking a look at the overall state of the game and, of course, protect the gaming experience of the other side.
If thats the case how many resources were burned in that time? How much quicker will the next chase be because they burnt the resources? Is it a killer that can laugh at hold W, or not? What perks are brought? What gens got done? Theres a metric ton of factors that goes into this.
The majority of killers are going to have a hard time stabilizing a game when you lost 60% of the objectives during the first chase. If you want to regulate how killers should act in order to give you a good experience playing, you have to reward the gameplay you want them to have. By playing the way survivors want killers to play, translates into killers never winning at the current state of the game.The problem with this is that there’s an asymmetry every game. When you have a chill killer but survivors playing to win no matter what you lose. If you have a killer playing to win and survivors chilling the killer will win, but, and this is the big one, if both are playing to win, most likely the survivors will win because of the current plethora of perks that exist, the time it takes to complete objectives and even more so now that they are adding a super powerful perk capable extending survivors time in game significantly.
Here is where the comp conversation came into place for me, because when you have both sides playing to win no matter what, the rules have to favor the killer, otherwise, they would be incapable of winning.
rules as far as we can tell. In one of your previous posts you said they had a rule to allow camping, from that we can infer that some don't and camping is outright banned. Meanwhile "normal" dbd has nothing to truly moderate any self imposed rules save the player's…conscience[?].
In this you reveal that you have never played competitive nor even watched or followed any of the DBD leagues.Here’s how it works: A team assigns a killer and faces the other team survivors, in that first set, the killer is aiming for the best possible result, being, killing every single survivor while having the most possible generators up. All 3 leagues allow face camping hook, survivors cannot free themselves even if they fill the anti camp meter.
99.9% of every game goes as follows: Killer gets into a chase, downs a survivor, looses 2 or 3 gens, camps the hook till at least second stage. Survivors go for rescue, they trade at hook; the killer slugs the rescuer and tunnels out the dead stage survivor.
Then well, it varies but the most common strategy is slugging till he has the chance to down the remaining 3 to get a 4k. Meh no?
Every single game where he cannot tunnel the dead hook survivor, the killer loses the game. (Unless he manages to slug all 4, which is an option reserved for 3 killers in the game, nurse, hillbilly or blight)
After, the other team killer plays to match the hook stages the first killer achieved.
Of course this is not the case of our regular gameplay, yet, it’s something that shows which are the most effective strategies to achieve the best possible result and diagnoses (granted, to a degree) the current state of the game.
Riot games does not balance LoL based on community feelings and “have fun protocols”, they evaluate the power of each champion based on their maximum possible performance.
Here the problem is that many times we end up balancing the game based on players feelings, so when one side plays to a decent capacity, the other side (killer) has a super tough time.
So now we ask the question: What could the devs possibly do? What could they change to make these theories gone? What reward could be worth more than a survivor "out" to the killer?
They could add an additional objective that provides a very heavy buff to either side, granting blood points. They could actually consider what happens when survivors utilize synergies with perks that make them unhookable. They could actually evaluate how long it takes to rush objectives if the players utilize every tool they get to do so. They could analyze the toxic strategies survivors can pull. They could actually take the time to balance killers and rework many of them that are simply weak. They could prevent slugging and tunneling by making the game a bit slower while granting small objectives that provide players blood points (like pumpkins) so players took a more “gentle” approach towards winning, since both sides are being rewarded by extending the game.We have no idea of the relevancy of this paragraph.
This is referring to the stats BH provided and the claims of the survivor community regarding killer strategies. If they patch perk an issue, might n or affect the strongest killers like it WILL affect the rest of the cast that is much weaker. So normally they change the meta with a macro change and then just shove a few seconds to certain killers thinking that’s a real buff, when a lot of times, is not enough. Why? Because getting into reworks, creating new abilities and such, is way harder than cranking some numbers. I am all for improvements, but responsable and well managed ones, not emotionally driven ones.Personally, being a Sadako main, would love some changes to the current meta, she doesn’t really fit haha.
I just want to “plant the seed” of: Sure, prevent slugging, prevent tunneling, but actually test out and give us something that leaves the game balanced.
The new perk, can potentially give a survivor 6 hook stages, allows them to choose who will handle the chases and paired with other perks, DS, OTR etc, would make (if survivors are playing to win in a decent skill level capacity) it imposible for the killer to win. So just test it out.
By the way, AI helped me with this, because every single time the 60-40 stat comes into conversation:
To calculate the killer's real chance of winning, we need to break down the probability of the killer eliminating at least 3 out of the 4 survivors, given that each survivor has a 40% escape chance, independently.
The probability of each survivor being killed is therefore:
P(kill)=1−0.4=0.6P(\text{kill}) = 1 - 0.4 = 0.6P(kill)=1−0.4=0.6
Using binomial probability, we can determine the chance that the killer will defeat exactly 3 or exactly 4 survivors out of 4.
So, the killer's real probability of winning each match is approximately 47.52%.
Despite each survivor having only a 40% chance to escape individually, the combined probabilities show that the killer wins (defeats at least 3 survivors) slightly less than half the time.
If you try to calculate the 4k, its lower even, because of Hatch, opening the door while killer closes hatch variables etc.
The majority of killers are going to have a hard time stabilizing a game when you lost 60% of the objectives during the first chase. If you want to regulate how killers should act in order to give you a good experience playing, you have to reward the gameplay you want them to have.
That's on the players though. We had little trouble and if we could do it, those better than us can as well. We asked a similar question in the previous post that's relevant here: What could the devs reward that would be acceptable? What would be worth it for people to follow this gameplay?
That second paragraph has a flaw: if both sides are trying to win its down more to skill and luck rather than the perks. The killers affect the gen times via perks or pressuring survivors (via brains, powers, good ol fashioned brute force, or most likely a combination) enough while the map can either help or hinder their ability to do so. What super perk? The hookstate trade? We think it's good but we're not going to see it as super unless it completely removes a hookstate.
Here’s how it works: A team assigns a killer and faces the other team survivors, in that first set, the killer is aiming for the best possible result, being, killing every single survivor while having the most possible generators up. All 3 leagues allow face camping hook, survivors cannot free themselves even if they fill the anti camp meter.
And here's where our point is proven. See one of us actually tried a competitive tournament back in 2018 (don't remember exact date) and there were a different rules than what you stated here. Then you point that survivors being handicapped which brings multiple thoughts such as "why are people worried enough about that to install a rule?" and "these people camp this much and are supposed to be the best?" and the like. If the killer camps it's no wonder gens go fast, the killer isn't being a threat.
it’s something that shows which are the most effective strategies to achieve the best possible result and diagnoses (granted, to a degree) the current state of the game.
Maybe it's because those players rely on said strategies to much and are bluntly unable to do much else? It shows what works best for them as each and every player is different. It's a similar vein to how many killers have a "main" who they excel with and suck with others even if they're considered "high tier".
Riot games does not balance LoL based on community feelings and “have fun protocols”, they evaluate the power of each champion based on their maximum possible performance.
Here the problem is that many times we end up balancing the game based on players feelings, so when one side plays to a decent capacity, the other side (killer) has a super tough tim
{Entity damn we need to start condensing}
League is different than DBD. League is an actual competitive game, DBD is no where close. DBD has much less players than League. DBD has more ways for players to straight up make others miserable for no practical reason than League (League to its credit can make players miserable but it's atleast in a practical sense).
They could
Extra necessary objectives would be fine with us but as we've seen how much gens can possibly regress it's would be unwise to implement. Some of these can be flipped to the killer. They might have had that idea with what happens when killers utilize the strategies you say are necessary with multiple perks that make things a pain (side note: what makes survivors truly unhookable? We can only think of temporary). We thought we weren't balancing things based on "an utopian concept of people acting by the approved norms of niceness." So why add a slowdown that can be used regardless if said strategies are used or not (disregarding the fact that people sadly only did pumpkins when effectively forced and currently totems work under this same idea)
This is referring to the stats BH provided and the claims of the survivor community regarding killer strategies.
So we're unsure of what specifically your addressing here so if we missed the point we'll apologize and ask for specific things. When perks change they affect each killer differently yes but we ask why on occasions that's not enough? Since reworking takes more time and effort why not use these as stp gap measures?
I just want to “plant the seed” of: Sure, prevent slugging, prevent tunneling, but actually test out and give us something that leaves the game balanced.
We don't repeat this to be mean, we repeat this cause it seems true to us: your arguments are not doing a good job of what you're trying to do.
We're ignoring this next paragraph cause "impossible to win" is heavily untrue.
As for the math, we've stated to others that clean numbers don't work in DBD because of one important element: the human element. Humans are prone to errors, which adds unknown variables in those clean numbers.
Edit: if we missed something please let us know as I (the rulebreaker responding) have a hard time reading all that and keeping it organized on a tiny phone
-
@WalterBlack said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3838606#Comment_3838606
Thanks for the tips guys - the area I struggle most with is crow-ing them but getting the follow up hit without blind luck (relying on shotgunning). The rest seems to make sense - are these long-range hits feasible? Because a lot of the time, Survivors tend to just dodge (or indeed, hop into a locker. Makes sense to bring Iron Maiden)
You need to learn the mind of each individual survivor if you don't want to shotgun, which technically isn't blind luck. What would this one do? Are they intelligent? Are they cowards? You get the picture. Depends on your definition of "long" for how common but yes they are possible. Map wide shots required some survivor support (or add on support) but generally long range is just a matter of practice. And yes iron maiden is a good pick for her.
-
We don't know what you're having problems with so we can only give general advice.
When trying to injured survivors with crows send only one at a time till you tag them. Then once tagged spread out the crows for coverage like a "shotgun". We have a preference to aim at where we don't want survivors to go similar to a Huntress trying to zone them.
Don't be trigger happy. Hypocritical coming from us but remember you don't always have to fire and the CD is much quicker if you don't.
To check gens try to line up crows so a single one gets multiple gens when possible. You can also do this as a quick way to check lockers if needed.
-
@Vishlumbra said:
I’m astonished how you people can’t read. My latest long post explains step step my concern, I go for the mediating approach, explaining the issues and I end up with “duh you can’t win without tunneling you must suck”… how you people type drooling all over your keyboards?
Because people won't take you seriously if you mock them?
@Vishlumbra said:
I posted this on another discussion but I’m tired to write more so I’ll just use to mention the issue there is.
The statistic is a bit mmm angled. The BH stats also show that survivors escape 40% of the time, we talking about individual players. There´s 4 of those EVERY match. That means that each one of them has a 40% chance. Im no math expert, but that means that, considering that a "win" according to BH and MMR is killing at least 3, it adds up to more than 40%. Yes, killing one starts to lower the chance for the survivors to live, but each having 40 means that the killer win stat is not as simple as you all love to put it.
We also have to consider that survivors can be mashed together in a single stat because they are basically the same, just re skins, where Killers are vastly different from each other, their powers range from worthless to extremely powerful so we cant just ignore those factors.
If you are having a field day winning, good for you, but thats not the experience of most killer mains. Geez dudes, as you love to toss the "simple stuff" factor, AFTER 1 CHASE if the survivors are not goofing around they will have completed 3 out of 5 gens. After 1 hook. That’s considering that all the survivor did was hold W and drop every pallet in sight. Don´t you think the game goes a bit too fast? I think that Haunted by Daylight showed us a possibility, because people were messing around with secondary objectives that rewarded BP and were fun. Games were a bit longer, you had a bit more freedom chosing perks, etc.
COMP is not a different game. It is the game played at the highest possible level. Just like in other games, the maximum capacity of players is used to gauge the state of characters and game design. You can´t just neglect everything saying " well they have more skill". I KNOW that they play for hooks, but thats the second game, on the first one, where the killer is doing ALL he can to win the game, it´s a forced strategy to slug, face camp, tunnel to have a chance. It is.
Now, you can ignore COMP, lets pretend you are completly right and is different to the point of being a "DIFFERENT GAME" (lol sorry). You CAN´T BALANCE A GAME with FACTORS OUTSIDE THE GAME DESIGN CORE. If a good group of players can end a game in 5 minutes against the best killer player in the world, you have to at least take a look at the state of the game. Killers DO NOT dominate. They dont. Thats why there are rules in place to actually make it possible to win against survivors that are playing at their maximun capacity. YOU HAVE TO BALANCE A GAME TO WHAT IS POSSIBLE TO DO. Everyone, eventually, plays to get better. The mayority of people play to WIN, not just clowing around etc. So, eventually, the skill base of players keeps rising and rising, if you neglect how the meta game looks like and just ignore the fact that is possible to utterly destroy a killer in 5 minutes, you are condeming your game in the long run. The game is succesful because of the thrill factor of surviving, facing the odds, right now is more like, unless survivors play EXTREMELY ALTRUISTIC, MAKE A BUNCH OF MISTAKES OR SIMPLY PLAY TO ANNOY instead of winning, the killer will lose.
There are lot of strategies survivors can use to counter every killer and most of them just involve rushing gens. Thats something to consider, also that holding a mouse button and sometimes pressing the space bar is by no means a hard skill to learn. If the game rewarded good chases, looping and strat from survivor side, we need to find ways to slow it down and give some type of objective to survivors so they can pursue other strategies instead of just, RUSH GENS, PRESSURE, END THIS.
Why do you think that slugging and tunneling exist? Do you think BH decided that’s how it should be played? NO.
Do you think that killer mains are just mean and want to annoy you? NO.
Players came up with this meta strategies after thousands and thousands of hours playing the game, finding what works and how to win. Game balance is exactly the same, you have to attend player complaints sure, but at the same time, consider every factor of why such strategies exist in the first place.
The problem is that balancing killers is harder than balancing survivors, because each one of them has different abilities and different power levels. Can’t just judge all of them, mix them in a bowl and claim that playing killer is easy, because it’s not, every killer main feels the change. If I play a brand new killer, right now, one that I have never played before, I will get a field day, but after certain amounts of games, every single one becomes a nightmare.
Finally, bringing streamers win rates into the conversation while neglecting competitive is just as incoherent.You cannot balance a game and program it accordingly an utopian concept of people acting by the approved norms of niceness.
You have to balance the game to what is POSSIBLE. In that case, the game is survivor side, period. If those players that play survivor want to avoid the current meta game, there has to be at least a conversation in which we consider why is it that killers are being forced to run perks that slow down the game and slug and tunnel etc.
If you are having a field day winning, good for you, but thats not the experience of most killer mains. Geez dudes, as you love to toss the "simple stuff" factor, AFTER 1 CHASE if the survivors are not goofing around they will have completed 3 out of 5 gens. After 1 hook. That’s considering that all the survivor did was hold W and drop every pallet in sight.
If thats the case how many resources were burned in that time? How much quicker will the next chase be because they burnt the resources? Is it a killer that can laugh at hold W, or not? What perks are brought? What gens got done? Theres a metric ton of factors that goes into this.
COMP is not a different game.
Yes. Yes it is. You are honestly going tell us that dbd with extra rules assigned is the same as "normal" dbd where everyone can do what they want within the devs ruleset? In addition each "comp" scene has different rules as far as we can tell. In one of your previous posts you said they had a rule to allow camping, from that we can infer that some don't and camping is outright banned. Meanwhile "normal" dbd has nothing to truly moderate any self imposed rules save the player's…conscience[?].
If a good group of players can end a game in 5 minutes against the best killer player in the world, you have to at least take a look at the state of the game.
Considering you have also previously said that the best killer in the world would "need" to camp we would question said claim to the best…Did said killer become the best by being a predictable and try to tunnel someone out asap? [apologies, he's getting off topic but he's got a point] If we're balancing on "whats possible to do" then theres alooooot of things to the point where the devs would need to chain up most actions and player agency is gone. The survivors can all spawn next to one gen in the corner, the killer can spawn within line of sight of a survivor (its hilariously awkward), the killer can chase multiple people at the same time if they all run the same way, the survivors can play it stealthy taking bits and pices of gens, survivors can body block and blind killers, the list goes ooooooooon.
Everyone whos left may eventually plays better but the mass exodus would possibly cripple the game. The game would change from "semi party game" to "comp game". And technically we can flip this coin. If these strategies got chained players would eventually play better without resorting to these as often. We're fairly sure that less people would leave from this than having all agency taken (and no taking these is not removing all agency).
Aside from all that, what you seem to not get is that not everyone here is the best of the best, nor wants to be top dog. There are those who are hyper focused to win at all costs sure, but theres also those who are [relatively] just chiling and trying to play the game.
There are lot of strategies survivors can use to counter every killer and most of them just involve rushing gens.
So we've been meaning to ask this, whats the killer doing once they hook someone? Cause its real hard to pressure gens if the killers pressuring the survivors trying to work.
Why do you think that slugging and tunneling exist? Do you think BH decided that’s how it should be played? NO.
Do you think that killer mains are just mean and want to annoy you? NO.
They exist because they're options when needed. Now we're going to ask again real nice like: What about the killers who do those in excess? Are survivors allowed to call them out or are they suppose to shut it? Cause while theres some overactive yits, there has been an uptick in both of those and it has been not necessary. When people abuse their toys they get taken for 2 examples: The "eruption, pain res, overbrine" era and the "unbreakable DS DH" era.
Game balance is exactly the same, you have to attend player complaints sure, but at the same time, consider every factor of why such strategies exist in the first place.
So keep in mind these are our theories as we're unsure of any facts the devs have stated.
Slugging is becoming more and more prevalent because people have gotten sick of gen regression being nerfed (it doesn't matter how much, big, small, whatever, they're annoyed it was touched again period) and have found it more satisfying to have a survivor effectively "out" of the game while wasting little time. The slugging everyone and hooking or letting them bleed is more a spite thing.
Tunneling is because removing a survivor is heavily beneficial, often low risk, and easy to do. We may dislike it, but that statement is a fact. People want the easy path to "victory". 1 + 1 = fish.
So now we ask the question: What could the devs possibly do? What could they change to make these theories gone? What reward could be worth more than a survivor "out" to the killer?
The problem is that balancing killers is harder than balancing survivors, because each one of them has different abilities and different power levels.
We have no idea of the relevancy of this paragraph.
Finally, bringing streamers win rates into the conversation while neglecting competitive is just as incoherent.
You cannot balance a game and program it accordingly an utopian concept of people acting by the approved norms of niceness.
Well, your kinda right here… Depending on the streamer they could use those rates for something. If said streamer isn't constrained by any arbitrary rules, fair game for the average masses (so to speak). That second sentence is iffy (technically you can). We somewhat agree you shouldn't balance the game around a set of behaviors approved by the others. That said you can balance it around removing things that make your players miserable or is being abused to do so. Also since its bhvrs game, they can do what they wish, but thats us being a prick :p.
a conversation in which we consider why is it that killers are being forced to run perks that slow down the game and slug and tunnel etc.
There are. multiple. happy hunting. For our 3 cents its because people grew to use them as a crutch.
-
@Vishlumbra said:
Easy kill? Ok so, you have 2 survivors remaining, let’s say 1 gen left and is kinda a 3 gen set up. Both guys on dead hook. I find one and I slug him to find the other one and secure a 4K. That survivor I’m looking has options you know?
If I’m camping the slugged one, the other one can finish gen and pressure me into leaving the guy on the ground, he could hide and maybe could get him up. (Maybe the downed survivor has unbreakable?)
I can risk hooking and basically secure a 3k but risk loosing a 4K, since he has time to look for hatch while I am hooking. He gets to hatch and waits there till I go look for it, he mocks me, escapes and insults me and mocks me during after match chat.
He could hide and bleed out his buddy so he secures hatch. Same thing, so he can make fun of me at hatch and then in chat.
He can hide and wait for the guy to be hooked or die, he has key so he positions himself to open hatch after I close it.
I get to hatch, I camp it so he has to ask for it. He hates me so he finishes last gen and aims to stealth to one of the two doors.I get to hatch, I camp it and he hides till I’m tired of waiting, he is not repairing gen so he waits till I close it and has a 50% chance of escaping through the door. (I get this 90% of the time, I had people waiting 30 mins without progressing gens so I am forced to close the hatch or wait the full hour) Then he insults me and makes a post saying every killer is toxic.
You give up.You try to rescue your slugged friend.
I play nice. I leave the area, they reset, I get them again and he proceeds to insult me and make a post in forums saying that they should nerf killers. Also says I am terrible and that I am a disgrace.
Idk what’s the protocol?
So what happened to the whole thing about being tired of complaints?
-
@radiantHero23 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3837119#Comment_3837119
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3837142#Comment_3837142
I'd be interested in every players ratio on what killers they like and what killers they don't.
Does the playerbase even like going against 50% of the killer roster?
Bet Vecna would be popular though~
….still looking for a damn vecna -
@OmegaXII said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3836462#Comment_3836462
Deliverance requires you to unhook someone else first. That's the restriction.
Burden exposes you for merely 20 seconds, so if Killer isn't proxy camp, this perk has literally 0 downside while being extremely powerful.
Out of curiosity have you tested both together on the ptb? Can you use Shoulder and then when you get hooked you get to use deliverance despite being on second stage?
-
@Vishlumbra said:
I mention comp because it would be the standard on how to play the game to win. Therefore giving an insight on what is needed to do so considering the current state of the game.
Forget about comp, imagine a regular match with good decent players. After the first chase, 2 or 3 of the objectives the killer needs to protect are gone, it doesn’t matter what he does. Again we are assuming survivors that are not messing around or clowning, they spawn and go into a gen, which is in most cases what happens. The player that went into chase is capable of dropping pallets, he is not a god of looping, just a normal player that is running windows of opportunity (most used perk in the game).
Currently, for killers to win (unless they have incredibly strong abilities like nurse and the knowledge to actually use those abilities correctly) you depend on survivor choices to aim for the win. If people neglect the person on hook, they will finish the gens sacrificing 1 but winning the match.
There is a reason why slow down perks are needed in most if not all killers and even with those, if you are playing a not so strong killer, you have to sacrifice fun perks or even a variety of perks to have a fighting chance. By design something is off.
And for the 100th time, I don’t want buffs to either side, I want people to understand that the reason these strategies they consider toxic exist, is because of their own choices during games, not because one side is incredibly stronger than the other.
A side note, if you don't quote people then you're effectively addressing the crowd. If you want to do so that's fine but it does make it hard to figure out what specifically your addressing.
We do get matches against them but we're also aware that the first gen or two doesn't matter as much as the 4th and 5th. Especially depending on what gen got done and how many resources we burnt in that time. As a second aside, off meta things such as blindness aflictors can immediately change a survivors "skill".
Currently, for killers to win
This paragraph we just disagree with. We have managed to win in the past without the strategies with a variety of killers against all types of survivors. We (as a trio) may be a rusty knife now but if we bother to sharpen ourselves we can do it again. It's not impossible for killers to win without reporting to these, just harder. Same goes for the paragraph below it.
And for the 100th time
We don't think we (Rulebreaker) have said anything about you wanting to buff a side. What we have said is that your arguments are weak and not aimed at what you want.
-
@KerJuice said:
Does anyone know why the turrets sometimes fail to kick it out of crawler mode? I see it getting burned, and hear it screaming- yet it still stays crawling.
They need a prolonged flame to remove tails and many xenos run an add on to increase the time. You need to cook your aliens thoroughly before serving
-
What we do is run to the closest turret (sometimes to the detriment of others) to hopefully kick them out of tail mode but otherwise play it like a more dangerous Nemi or Slinger. Anything a Nemi would whip you at the tail can do, but better and anything a slinger can shoot through gets the nope treatment as well (aka don't stand near holes in rails or walls). If not in tail mode then xenos a temporary m1 and is treated like a t2 Meyers, could pop into power at any point.
Supposed when typing this that the short version is be paranoid...
-
@Vishlumbra said:
I really dont see why my post has becomed a battle against comp, or killers or trying to protect survivors. I am advocating for leaving the game as it is without implementing more nerfs.
It really makes no sense the arguments you are all giving, mainly because you claim is a matter of MMR and that the game is balanced and not survivor biased because of how some people chose to play. If anyone with higher skill claims or proves something and you all assume he is always wrong and that shouldnt apply to the "real" game, how come EVERY SINGLE TIER LIST OF KILLERS ranks nurse, blight and hillbilly top spot. Have you faced a normal nurse? They are terrible. Same could be said of a bad billy or blight, yet those lists are based on a good skill and performance from above avarage players, how come when it comes to the macro game, that goes out of the window and you all just try to demerit every argument I give. Good survivors are the top tier, not killers. I want survivors nerfed? NO. I want killers BUFFED? NO (At least on a macro level, a few of them could use some buffs, namely Freddy, Onryo, Trapper etc).
I am not fighting against anyone, I am not the one that makes dozens of posts every single day crying about slugging or camping or tunneling, I am trying to make people understand that those are needed strategies. Dont you think there are toxic survivor strategies? Mainly is a fault at design but have you ever faced an unhookable group of survivors, with map offering camping a gen at a top floor? Making hooks invisible, boil over, no mitter etc? If you dont slug they would win 100%. What we doing about those? Should we nerf those perks because it feels bad for the killer? No. It is fine.
I think what we all should be asking for is update for certain killers that are outdated and weak. Asking for real updates to killer powers instead of moving a few numbers (Cough Ghostface), more fun elements to survivor gameplay, new posibilities or maps, good new content, not just judging every single killer as the same and claiming they HAVE to stop the slugging and tunneling. If those were to dissapear, they would have to actually invest a lot of time balancing killers to have better chances of winning.
Btw stats say that with good perks, survivors have a high 35%-40% chance of surviving, in order to tie a game, you have to beat those odds twice. If you aspire to win as killer three times. Can’t really base everything on killers win 60% survivors 40%.
Maybe because you brought up comp? It would go a long way to explain it. You also referenced the comp scene for balance reasons (ie: these things shouldn't be nerfed because in comp they're needed to "win". Paraphrased of course but you get the point.) which probably doesn't help. Ohh also:
@Vishlumbra said:
The nerfs are in place so it´s basically an uphill battle against you all I guess. Its borderline comical saying that competitive is not important, those players are basically proving of what each player is capable off, providing with real insight on why certain aspects are unbalanced and pretty much pointing you in the right direction. (Maybe thats why the leagues are run by players?)
When you have the best Killer players in the planet HAVING to use such strategies to win, that might tell you something about the state of the game. (Which imo, is fine as it is). That should bring up that "Empathy" and understand that the tools to win as survivors are in place and not just feel entiltled to demmand butchering 50% of the game.
I am trying to stop the posture of thinking the game should give even more tools to survivors to win because they feel bad for a lost game.
I am not FEEDING the idea that slugging or tunneling, I am not advocating that that is the way it SHOULD be played, I am saying it is PART of the game and it is needed sometimes, and just because it feels bad being tunneled or being on the ground, that doesnt mean we should nerf every strategy killers come up with to try to win.
Your indirectly claiming comp maters more and saying they're the best of the best while ignoring the pitfalls of comp and the inherent RNG and chaos of the average wild match.
As we said in our last post, your not making strong arguments for your case.
Those three hold the top spots in tier list cause first: those are opinions of the Creator of said lists. Second because while we shouldn't count explicitly bad players, an average Billy or blight will still do very well against an average team.
You keep saying they're needed but you refuse to address how players are explicitly using said strategies to make playing survivor worse. Of course there's toxic survivor strategies but there are ways to practically negate a majority of them as killer while survivors can only weaken them, especially when there's skill gaps common in the wild. This doesn't make them ok but ATM killers can effectively make sure survivors play very very little. Side note how are you getting invisible hooks?
Btw stats say that with good perks, survivors have a high 35%-40% chance of surviving, in order to tie a game, you have to beat those odds twice.
Can you please show us those stats?
-
@GeneralV said:
In my opinion, comp DBD is meaningless.
It is external, not experienced by the vast majority of people who play this game and it has several restrictions that a regular match does not have.
I believe it shouldn't even be mentioned, let alone considered, when discussing the actual balance of the game.
Thank you 👏
-
@Vishlumbra said:
Of those you mentioned, only Alien is considered decent tier. Onryo is a joke and needs buffs. Giving killers secondary objectives because there´s a fault in the design to escape is not a solution. Without slugging 4ks are a coin toss. Without tunneling, the game is incredibly hard to win. AGAIN I DO NOT ADVOCATE FOR BUFFING KILLERS. I am trying to provide an insight on why sometimes these kind of strategies are needed. Everyday there is a post, "Slug is bad, tunneling is bad". I think you all forget I also play as survivor and I have also experienced such games, yet I dont think the solution is just assume that every killer is busted and we need to nerf them to the ground.
NOT EVERY SINGLE GAME IS A SLUG FEST. Just as not every game is a nightmare versus a pro killer.
Somebody mentioned competitve where killers tend to win more and thats not the case, the most common result is a draw, and in all 3 leagues of competitive DBD, slugging and camping hook is not only allowed, is needed to win as killer. In those games, where survivors are trying to win, they had to implement a rule where camping is allowed, otherwise the killer would never win.
I think that creating a mechanic where a downed survivor has a 4% chance to stand up or bleed out would make it faster if you allready lost the game WHILE also keeping your BP and avoiding people to just DC before the match ends.
I just dont want more nerfs. I think that most killers mains would agree that a lot of times facing a group of good survivors is not even fun, is just stressful.
Your not really helping the case then.
Without slugging 4ks are a coin toss. Without tunneling, the game is incredibly hard to win. AGAIN I DO NOT ADVOCATE FOR BUFFING KILLERS.
What's wrong with a coin toss? We're assuming in this scenario that you gotten 2 dead and a 3rd at your mercy. What's wrong with leaving a non annoying one a luck based chance to escape? What's wrong with going the hard way if you feel like showing some empathy for the other side or simply for the challenge. After all of you end up relying on tunneling your going to hit a wall. Meanwhile the lack of empathy will cause the complaints to grow more. Yes we're aware they'll never truly go away but it's not going to help put out the fire by feeding it. And this third sentence makes it seem your just complaining about complaining... which to be fair is understandable but it doesn't help the "no more nerfs" case you want.
I think you all forget I also play as survivor and I have also experienced such games, yet I dont think the solution is just assume that every killer is busted and we need to nerf them to the ground.
To be fair to everyone, we don't think anyone knows anything about you. For all they know you could be fully one side while saying all this. We don't particularly care but throwing that out there.
"competitve"
We only put that there because we don't understand what the small "competitive" scene has to do with the "average" ocean sized crowd. This maybe a personal thing but we consider "comp" a joke as apparently many have restrictions that aren't in the "wild". Like seriously, they added a "rule" to allow camping when in the wild it's fair game by default?
I think that creating a mechanic where a downed survivor has a 4% chance to stand up or bleed out would make it faster if you allready lost the game WHILE also keeping your BP and avoiding people to just DC before the match ends.
While we think it would be amusing, it probably won't end well. We would love to see it tested though. This also doesn't help the "no more nerfs" case though.
-
Not to sound too rude but can you give us a condensed version so we don't have to dig through 2 literal walls of text?
-
@Vishlumbra said:
The best killer in the world, let’s say Zaka for example, on equal ground has to:
Chase 1 survivor for 2 minutes or so to get a hook, in the meantime he lost 2 gens and about to lose a third one. He has to camp the hook till at least second stage, survivors move to rescue, he slugs one if he is lucky and he has to go into chase again, he finally kills one, and by that time there’s 1 (very rarely 2 gens up) and you are talking about the best killer player in the world. Mind you, with the advantage of not allowing a survivor to unhook himself. He then has to slug till he gets a chance to win or lose the match. That’s 90% of every competitive game.
That sounds like a core design fault killer biased?….Wait why would the best killer need to camp till second stage instead of actually hindering the rest of the survivors? What the heck kinda play is that?
-
@Vishlumbra said:
I feel like I’m not making myself clear here and the point is being deterred from the point I wanted to make.
I mentioned competitive because it’s the evidence that every survivor team has the tools (perks, skills and add ons) to make the killer life a nightmare. That’s how it is.
The main problem with online games (and their best attribute) is that they are in fact social games and you depend on a group not only yourself to perform.
Considering how it goes, when you play survivor you get a higher chance of having people who are just messing around, perhaps just doing a challenge or just trying to be funny and such. When you queue as killer, you are alone and you depend only in yourself to aim for the win.
There’s not an innate biased unbalance towards making killers win, in essence, the ones that have it easier to win are survivors IF they aim for that. Everyone has the choice to play the way they want but that does not mean that they should nerf killers because you need to win because you keep having bad luck on teammates or you are not making yourself better or even aiming to win a match. We all like to win and really sometimes I do get annoyed by over friendly killers who don’t do anything. Sure, I’ll appreciate a display of mercy here and then and some degree of silliness but it seems that you all want that to be the norm and when you don’t get it, boom, you become toxic and want to nerf every possibility the killer has.
Maybe you all don’t play killer or haven’t faced a group of good survivors. It’s tough, you need to be on your A game to have a chance. Slugging is valid if you aiming to win, with some perks is actually the only chance you get, (cough unhookable survivors), tunneling sometimes is needed. It is and I been that survivor that gets deleted during the first 5 mins of the match and I can understand why I was a chance for the killer to win.
High MMR and high rating is inclined to survivors. That’s what the game at its core it’s programmed to be, yet, thanks to certain aspects, matchmaking and general posture of players during a match, killers tend to do slightly better considering the WHOLE ocean of players. But that doesn’t mean they need to keep nerfing every strategy for killers, it is already super frustrating at times aiming for that 4K.
Play to win and you will win most matches. As simple as that. If you are lucky and you get 1,2 or 3 people who want the same, you will win the match. There’s no way to win versus a team that is doing objectives every second and aiming to win. There isn’t really, so, altering more and more and making killers weaker and weaker will only make it worst.
Now correct us if we're wrong here, but your of the opinion that should a group of "good" survivors want to win and actually go for it that theres nothing killers can do to win themselves?
Well first off thats a nope right there. You said it yourself, play to win and you win most matches. This applies to the killers too.
Then your forgetting a very crucial part here. Dbd is what many call a game and many people play games for fun. Those strategies getting weaker and weaker, what were they? Camping the hooks to keep trading survivors like a carousel at best to effectively not letting a player actually play the game at worst, 3-gen camps to stall the game to oblivion, tunneling survivors at the beginning of a trial till they're eliminated with pittance for points and depending on skill level barely any time to play, stacking slowdown after slowdown after slowdown while doing one of the previous, trying slug each and every survivor right out the (metaphorical) gate…gosh these are loads of fun for survivors. Now we havent been paying to much attention (sans the new perks and puppy) so if we did miss something please let us know.
Sometimes these things are called for we agree, but usually in a moderation or lesser form (ex: slugging a survivor under a pallet vs slugging a survivor next to a wall in the middle of proverbial nowhere or tunneling someone whos unhooked infront of you vs going strait back for the unhook when you were chasing another injured survivor) and what we've noticed over our long time here is that people abuse the hell outta everything which the devs have to then step in and figure out the lesser evil between the 2 warring tribes while the third is left in the aftermath trying to adapt.
We're also tired of all the complaining, but theres 2 sides to the coin and everyones got something to pick at.
-
Puppies!
Nothing else matters now we'll happily take back half the bad things we've ever said about the game
-
@UndeddJester said:
I believe in you.
I'm sure as a gamer you can make that assessment as to whether or not you should start repairing gens again irrespective of the DS timer.
Moreover I trust you to be mature enough to accept the consequences if you make the wrong decision, and learn/grow to not make the same mistake again.
You've got this man.
It's nice to know some people still have hope for others every now and then
-
@brewingtea said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3832606#Comment_3832606
Game
They keep releasing perks that are more and more powerful (because why would they charge for perks that are WEAKER than what's already in the game?) and killers that are more powerful (Dracula is just Spirit with 2 extra powers) so you either go full meta or get stomped.
If they were creative and could think of NEW powers for killers to have, or NEW things for perks to modify, this wouldn't be a problem. But every perk is just more aura reading, more gen regression, faster vaults, etc…
We hardly see how Dracs perks are stronger than some of the past things, things that many people keep using at that instead of the newer things. And that's not going into the fact you're able to run non meta and win as either side (survivors need competent teammates but that's again players, not the game). Still on players.
What would you consider new? Whenever the devs have gone into super new territory it's been either applause or riots with little in-between. The last thing we'd say is wholly new would be either Hux or Chucky. We can think of a few new things but we'd bet cold hard blood points that a large vocal group would immediately be against them. If the devs did something drastic but new would you be on board?
-
Hex_Ignored probably has it best, event exclusives. Only a handful of challenges we can think of actually involved going into the void, the rest were relatively standard challenges that needed done in the event mode.
For whatever small comfort it is, we and our friends have been liberally using the void and to our detriment so have many killers we've seen. (have been "training" new blood so that might have something to do with it)
-
Maybe eventually you'll get some decent people as killer and can get them done in time?
We'd offer some better encouragement but we kinda suck at it…
If your hell bent on grinding it, maybe a discord for swfs?
Apologies since we can't really help
-
@Shinkiro said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3832701#Comment_3832701
Not dismiss, just pointing out that any "issues" you might have are personal and don't represent any state of the game in any way. Certainly not to any extent that a perfectly fine mechanic needs counter productive changes.
I'm not missing the point, but you're veering off the topic of the basekit mori to continue your argument, which is pretty indicative of not having a counter point. While people need BP 99% of people arent going to be running a mori offering, making that a moot point.
Yes, im one of the killers who isnt interested in waiting for a survivor to drag out their death on hook, im not particularly bias for or against the mori, it's just a bonus if i dont have to wait more than it takes to hook, which cant be said of you in this argument. The thing you're missing is you can't really change people's behaviour in significant degress, if they want to mori they will mori. Adding restrictions onto it just makes your "issues" worse and the killers experience worse for no real gain.
A great example of confirmation bias is the so called "slugging epidemic", where ive experienced virtually no slugging except tactical slugging. Nothing has changed yet people are claiming otherwise. Just like you are seeing this as an issue and im not, and there's certainly no comparison between this "issue" and the "slugging issue" in terms of people moaning about it so it really shows is not a problem at all.
We didn't get a ping for this one and just saw this.
Certainly not to any extent that a perfectly fine mechanic needs counter productive changes.
We have stated why we think it could use tweaking. If you don't think they are enough reason that is fine, but we have stated multiple times.
While people need BP 99% of people arent going to be running a mori offering, making that a moot point.
We're unsure as to where the BP reasoning came from as the offering is to literally see the mori multiple times. That trail of thought was in response to your worries about if bhvr wanted to monetize moris. If people want to see the mori and not jump through hoops, they have the option of said offering.
you're missing is you can't really change people's behaviour in significant degress, if they want to mori they will mori. Adding restrictions onto it just makes your "issues" worse and the killers experience worse for no real gain.
Depends on whos definition of significant. As the new mori system has changed it enough that its significant by our definition, we feel it can be changed that same degree via this. Will it actually work? Who knows, but we'd like something to change. Hell make it so if everyone else is on hook the mori can go right away.
A great example of confirmation bias is the so called "slugging epidemic", where ive experienced virtually no slugging except tactical slugging. Nothing has changed yet people are claiming otherwise. Just like you are seeing this as an issue and im not, and there's certainly no comparison between this "issue" and the "slugging issue" in terms of people moaning about it so it really shows is not a problem at all.
That would be your own experience then. Read some of the above such as Wezqu and in General chat Laluzi made a thread that has a more…eloquent[?] explaining of our thoughts. Theres some saying about if you don't see it it doesn't exist but none of us can remember.
-
@MaddieMage said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3833625#Comment_3833625
W post. I literally said aura reading was gonna end up being OP once they nerfed the one perk survivors had to combat full aura builds.
Outta curiosity, how does aura reading suddenly become op since people have to actively and actually go and catch said revealed survivor?
-
@09SHARKBOSS said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3833690#Comment_3833690
quick question are you a hivemind?
or are there multiple people using the same account?
just curious as a skeletal eldritch horror myself
-
@smurf said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3833726#Comment_3833726
Yeah, I fully agree that players should be more aware of how their playstyles affect other players' experiences.
I think the MMR system gives a score to survivors based on how often they escape through the gate (win) through hatch (tie) or get sacrificed (loss), and killers based on how often they get a win (3k or 4k), tie (2k), or loss (0k or 1k). (With killers' scores are centered around a 60% kill rate.) Then the system attempts to match survivors and killers with similar scores into matches, but also prioritizes matchmaking speed. I've heard people argue that this can lead to people needing to rely on tunneling, camping, etc. for wins if they want to stay at their MMR when they've overrelied on those tactics to get to their current MMR. It could be that those players would do those things anyway though :(
I guess the issue with these is that we can fix oppressive or abusive playstyles in two ways. Incentives/disincentives to push people toward fun playstyles can be coded in, or we can try to change the culture around the game. My feeling is that we should always promote a positive gaming culture, but we'll probably always have some players who play in ways that make their opponents' experiences worse than they should be. Then if we can't successfully manage the gaming experience through social incentives, updates to in-game effects will be needed. I suspect we'll generally need an approach incorporating both?
killers based on how often they get a win (3k or 4k), tie (2k), or loss (0k or 1k). (With killers' scores are centered around a 60% kill rate.)
This is the part we're confused by. By "killers score" are you referring to the killer "character" or "player"? The kill rate is based off the first while match making is based off the latter.
Regardless of that train of thought, there's not going to be a clean solution to fixing "bad behavior". Incentives will only work for those who care, those that don't will continue as normal. Deincentivising (butchered spelling) would need to be extremely specific less you begin to remove player agency, which is a slippery slope. We'd agree that to truly curb it you'd need both.
-
@smurf said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3833686#Comment_3833686
Actually, the 60% kill rate is somewhat related to this. Survivors are matched against killers that are considered by their kill-rates to be likely to take out 60% of survivors on average.
That explicitly leads to pairings where these behaviors are happening. This is presumably because people some players think they have to try as hard as they can and 'win' at all costs, leading them to higher MMR than they should really be in.
When players tunnel and proxy camp and slug for 4k, they can easily increase their kill rate without needing much skill to do it. That gives them harder matches because the MMR system then sees their kill rate and gives them harder opponents. Then those players keep tunneling and camping because they don't even have the skill to compete with the players they're up against otherwise. The same thing happens to people who hide all match as survivors and get hatch all the time, and get out through the gate when their teammates are good.
Having said that, changing the 60% kill rate to 50% or 40% could lead to the same thing, though the dynamics of it might play out differently. So changing the target kill-rates may or may not solve the problem. But coding a prevention mechanism for some playstyles will directly impact player experience. This indicates that the solution to the problem of abusive playstyles could really be to code in prevention mechanisms for tunneling, camping, and other problematic playstyles.
We're about 80% sure that's not how it works. Survivor players are matched with killer players based on their MMR. The kill rate is how well the collective players of that killer do, or more accurate, kill survivors. They aren't matched with a specific killer due to kill rates (ie a survivor wouldn't specifically be matched with a Wesker for surviving often). We could be wrong but we'd like solid proof first.
You kinda backed my point here on how it's the players fault. People keep thinking this or that leading them to do that or this. That isn't anyone's fault but the players.
-
We'd throw PyramidHead in kinda. The trail and punishment isn't really a part of him but splattering survivors sure is and we get the devs had to give him something
-
@KA149108 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3832681#Comment_3832681
But devs are in charge of perks and gen times, and they've aimed for a 60% kill rate which means yeh, they are. There are also issues that have not been addressed. You can't make one side hell to play and expect people to still be happy and buy dlc that's what im saying.
The only thing that is the devs fault is issues that haven't been addressed. That 60 kill rate has zip to do with a lot of your original post. Also what do perks and gen times have to do with sweaty players who are tunneling and dancing on you?
They (the devs) didn't make it hell to play is what we're saying. As we've told Autharia above it's the fault of players. The devs didn't tell people to sweat an ocean. The devs didn't tell people to be arses to each other. The devs certainly don't hold loved ones hostage telling them to do this or that (that we know of). All those problems are laid at the players feet. Can the devs do something extreme and chain up every single problem? Maybe, but it's going to cost player agency and probably the life of the game.
-
@CountOfTheFog said:
If I want as many Survivors infected then I should wait to visit the fountain that turns the purge red, correct? Because the red doesn't actually infect people? @Rulebreaker
Yup. Though if people do keep cleaning for whatever reason your getting red regardless. Experience tells best when to grab a fountain. Red does damage people though so it aint all bad. (Our experience its usually once you grab red people either start cleaning like Edgarpoop said or they start to die fast, map depending)